What so many people don't understand is that oil is important for so much more than their gas tanks... All the time people, particularly other fiscally conservative people (I am a serious fiscal conservative myself), are willing to basically say we just need to come up with alternative energy sources before the oil runs out. But when the oil runs out, we're not just out of gas. We're out of plastic. How much of what we use in the modern world is made of plastic? Not just the plastics that make cheap lawn furniture and package food, either. Rayon, polyester, nylon, anything else starting with poly. Also virtually all synthetic drugs. The organic building blocks for virtually all synthetic materials on earth come from crude oil. Are there other sources of organic molecules? Yes, but they are orders of magnitude slower and more expensive to harness and utilize. The future of the pharmaceutical industry, chemical research of all kinds, and all synthetic products are tied up in the crude oil supply. So you can be as fiscally conservative as you want, but I just can't see a viewpoint that includes ridiculing a plan for promoting alternative energy research as anything but totally irresponsible. Of course, most people that have those views are just totally ignorant of the long-term ramifications, but that really doesn't justify it.

Posted by dahsdebater on 11/5/2012 10:16:00 PM (view original):What so many people don't understand is that oil is important for so much more than their gas tanks... All the time people, particularly other fiscally conservative people (I am a serious fiscal conservative myself), are willing to basically say we just need to come up with alternative energy sources before the oil runs out. But when the oil runs out, we're not just out of gas. We're out of plastic. How much of what we use in the modern world is made of plastic? Not just the plastics that make cheap lawn furniture and package food, either. Rayon, polyester, nylon, anything else starting with poly. Also virtually all synthetic drugs. The organic building blocks for virtually all synthetic materials on earth come from crude oil. Are there other sources of organic molecules? Yes, but they are orders of magnitude slower and more expensive to harness and utilize. The future of the pharmaceutical industry, chemical research of all kinds, and all synthetic products are tied up in the crude oil supply. So you can be as fiscally conservative as you want, but I just can't see a viewpoint that includes ridiculing a plan for promoting alternative energy research as anything but totally irresponsible. Of course, most people that have those views are just totally ignorant of the long-term ramifications, but that really doesn't justify it.

I'm for drilling for more oil.... and building more nuclear plants.

we can run submarines on nuclear... and France can run 80% of their country in it.... why can't we?

oil will run out. unfortunately, neither the head of the epa, the secretary of energy, the ceo's of big oil, nor the world's top geologists can say with any certainty if that will happen by 2025 or by 2125. it's possible that the third world will become advanced enough that we eat through those reserves much more quickly than anticipated. it's equally possible that offshore drilling will uncover vast new reserves that we weren't aware of, and that drilling will become more efficient so that we're more productive at harvesting that oil.

very few will dispute that alternative energy is the future. as a prescriber to the field of keynesian economics, i'm of the opinion that the private sector will develop these technologies when there is a an ample market to do so. furthermore, national governments have proven grossly ineffective at stimulating these breakthroughs with public dollars.

so, to conclude, alternative energy is a necessity. unfortunately, government intervention in energy policy (from a United States standpoint, see Solyndra, the Keystone Pipeline, and ANWR) has proven burdensome and misguided.

when exxon, bp, and duke energy realize that we've hit peak oil, they'll divert their resources into alternative energy in order to maintain revenues. above all, corporations desire profits and business growth, and alternative energy will receive its due day in the sun when oil is no longer king.

politicians- in contrast with oil executives who have spent their entire lives examining energy policies- are generally out of their element when effecting private sector stimuli. so, i'll leave energy decisions to people who make their livings doing just that; the market and the fumbling 535 should as well.

Posted by dahsdebater on 11/5/2012 10:16:00 PM (view original):What so many people don't understand is that oil is important for so much more than their gas tanks... All the time people, particularly other fiscally conservative people (I am a serious fiscal conservative myself), are willing to basically say we just need to come up with alternative energy sources before the oil runs out. But when the oil runs out, we're not just out of gas. We're out of plastic. How much of what we use in the modern world is made of plastic? Not just the plastics that make cheap lawn furniture and package food, either. Rayon, polyester, nylon, anything else starting with poly. Also virtually all synthetic drugs. The organic building blocks for virtually all synthetic materials on earth come from crude oil. Are there other sources of organic molecules? Yes, but they are orders of magnitude slower and more expensive to harness and utilize. The future of the pharmaceutical industry, chemical research of all kinds, and all synthetic products are tied up in the crude oil supply. So you can be as fiscally conservative as you want, but I just can't see a viewpoint that includes ridiculing a plan for promoting alternative energy research as anything but totally irresponsible. Of course, most people that have those views are just totally ignorant of the long-term ramifications, but that really doesn't justify it.

I'm for drilling for more oil.... and building more nuclear plants.

we can run submarines on nuclear... and France can run 80% of their country in it.... why can't we?

NIMBY: google it, and there's your answer as to why nuclear energy will never be possible in nations with strong state and local governments.

Posted by dahsdebater on 11/5/2012 10:16:00 PM (view original):What so many people don't understand is that oil is important for so much more than their gas tanks... All the time people, particularly other fiscally conservative people (I am a serious fiscal conservative myself), are willing to basically say we just need to come up with alternative energy sources before the oil runs out. But when the oil runs out, we're not just out of gas. We're out of plastic. How much of what we use in the modern world is made of plastic? Not just the plastics that make cheap lawn furniture and package food, either. Rayon, polyester, nylon, anything else starting with poly. Also virtually all synthetic drugs. The organic building blocks for virtually all synthetic materials on earth come from crude oil. Are there other sources of organic molecules? Yes, but they are orders of magnitude slower and more expensive to harness and utilize. The future of the pharmaceutical industry, chemical research of all kinds, and all synthetic products are tied up in the crude oil supply. So you can be as fiscally conservative as you want, but I just can't see a viewpoint that includes ridiculing a plan for promoting alternative energy research as anything but totally irresponsible. Of course, most people that have those views are just totally ignorant of the long-term ramifications, but that really doesn't justify it.

I'm for drilling for more oil.... and building more nuclear plants.

we can run submarines on nuclear... and France can run 80% of their country in it.... why can't we?

NIMBY: google it, and there's your answer as to why nuclear energy will never be possible in nations with strong state and local governments.

We need to legalize reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel, that would take care of roughly 95% of the problem - once fuel is about 5% spent, it's no longer capable of sustaining a sufficiently energetic fission chain reaction to be useful for generating electricity. Obviously storing the actual fission biproducts is a problem, but realistically storing it in a government facility will not prove impossible. Nuclear alone isn't going to totally solve the problem, though. You need to also improve electrification of transportation so that the power generated from nuclear facilities can be harnessed for transportation as well. It's ridiculous to anticipate the private sector entirely taking care of these things, the research cycle is too long and the return too moderate to be worth investing in while oil still exists. If we want to preserve some organic building blocks government funding for basic energy research is important. In some ways it's inefficient based on the bureaucracies that dispense funding, but the utilization of resources is better in the public sector. This is primarily a result of information-sharing, which allows a much broader pool of great minds to attack and solve problems in a university setting as opposed to the private sector where everything is proprietary.